Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chetco, Arizona

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Joyous! | Talk 03:03, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Chetco, Arizona

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is an odd case. The coords in the article were off, but fixing them didn't make a difference: this is the "same" place as Sanders. I don't have much of a history to work with on the topos but it appears that the name Chetco was (re-)added to the maps in the 2012-ish update, though GNIS says it was collected in the original scrape of the maps. In any case the current map's claim that Chetco is on the north of I-40 and Sanders is on the south is just nonsense: the original settlement was all on the north, and that's where the elementary and middle school have been since at least the late 1960s, when the southern portion barely existed; and that's where older topos say Sanders was. As to text references, results are heavily tainted by the area in Oregon; the only clear reference was in a short story in which it appears in a list of towns passed through on a bus, taking the place of Sanders in the numeration. I don't know what that means, and I didn't see the name on the highway signs. It's certainly possible that it is an older name for Sanders, or the Navajo name, but I couldn't find something to cite to this effect. Mangoe (talk) 01:03, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you mean about Oregon. I also saw the fiction piece about a bus ride. I don't think I have ever seen the name on a sign either and I used to regularly drive I-40 through AZ. Passing mention here. (fwiw they say it is "next to" Sanders). Unclear whether this source is reliable but it won't matter if we don't find others. Re: Navajo, I don't think so. Not a speaker of the language, so I could be wrong, but I once spent a lot of time in NM, where it's an official language and appears on all official signage, ie rules for riding public transit. Most words have a lot more vowels, with diacriticals. Will look more later, need to tie up some loose ends rn Elinruby (talk) 06:06, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Arizona. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:11, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect There's not enough solid information about Chetco to mention it in the Sanders article, but a redirect couldn't hurt. BruceThomson (talk) 07:42, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have to reiterate my view that redirecting to an article that isn't going to talk about the subject is a bad idea. Also, the big problem is that we really don't know where this name comes from. I can't see having a redirect fo it when we don't know if it's a fiction or a mistake. Mangoe (talk) 23:34, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:23, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Not enough information to support a standalone article or redirect. Agree with Mangoe that redirecting is inappropriate when not mentioned in the target, particularly in cases like this one where we can't verify what it was or if it even existed. –dlthewave ☎ 18:14, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:V and WP:GEOLAND, given the lack of reliable sources supporting the subject's existence. All I can find is sources about the Chetco River (Oregon) or the Chetco Bar Fire (also Oregon). I agree we shouldn't redirect if we have no evidence the subject exists, we could give readers the idea that it's a legitimate alternative name. Hut 8.5 19:11, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.